Bill Gates is one of the most relevant people in the world of technology, and today it is thanks to him that almost all computers in the world use Windows.
In the mobile market we live a very different reality, and although Windows Mobile had a certain domain, the arrival of the iPhone and after Android reduced the system to absolute non-existence.
Could the reality of the market have been different? Bill Gates believes it is his own fault that today we are not using all Windows. But would it really be like that? And why didn't he do it?
The former CEO of Microsoft confesses: he was not doing what he should
Bill Gates founded Microsoft with Paul Allen in 1975, a company that would eventually become the biggest tech giant of its time, which made Gates the richest person in the world.
Windows has been for decades one of the most representative products, the system that became practically in monopoly for personal computers (because Linux and Mac exist at a much lower scale).
With the arrival of the PDAs, Windows Mobile had some relevance, but the iPhone and later Android devastated him. Microsoft tried to reinvent itself with Windows Phone 7, 8 and 10, but it was too late and Android and iOS were a duopoly.
Bill Gates believes that Windows could have been the dominant mobile system, but that I wasn't at what I should be and they stayed at the gates of success.
Bill Gates could not pay the necessary attention by being distracted against monopoly claims.
And why does it say this? Bill Gates refers to competition policies, which at that time investigated Microsoft for monopolistic practices. An issue that has lengthened over time for years.
Because of all these problems, Bill says he was "too distracted" to pay the necessary attention to Windows Mobile.
Those distractions made the launch of the version they were preparing will arrive three months late in a release they could have launched with Motorola.
Finally it was Google who launched the Motorola Droid, a mobile that catapulted the success of Android in the US market and here we know as Motorola Milestone.
Is Bill Gates right?
Judging these situations is sometimes very complicated, because we tend to compare the Android with the Windows Phone that we had instead of the one we could have had.
Is that difference of 3 months so relevant? If it is the mobile that gets to popularize a system in one of the main markets if, for several reasons:
- Popularity attracts developers, one of the reasons why Windows Phone has not been competitive.
- Having a bestseller extends the brand to the public, which generates demand. And the demand generates that more manufacturers want to use this system.
There are opportunities that are an all or nothing. And the battle for the mobile market was one of them.
In the end, such competitive advantages of very few months are capable of generate a snowball effect which is unstoppable even against rivals with a better product.
Windows Phone 7 is a perfect example. It came at a time when it swept in terms of fluidity and performance against an Android that was still very immature. But still immature, it had already spread in the market and had the attention of developers as the alternative to iOS that had a better future.
Another thing that is clear is that Bill Gates would not make a difference as a programmer, but paying full attention to the team that was developing the system would have granted them